On 11/02/2013 11:26 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 11/02/2013 11:54 AM, Adrian Otto wrote:
Noorul,
I agree that key decisions should be tracked in blueprints. This is the
one for this decision which was made in our 2013-10-18 public meeting.
Jay's submission is consistent with the direction indicated by the team.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/solum/+spec/rest-api-base
Transcript log:
http://irclogs.solum.io/2013/solum.2013-10-08-16.01.log.html
<http://irclogs.solum.io/2013/solum.2013-10-08-16.01.log.html>
Heh, not much discussion there. :-)
Agreed. I actually didn't know anything about the discussion -- I wasn't
at the meeting. I just figured I would throw some example code up to
Gerrit that shows how Falcon can be used for the API plumbing. Like I
mentioned in a previous email, I believe it's much easier to discuss
things when there is sample code...
Here's my take ... Pecan+WSME has been pushed as the thing to
standardize on across most OpenStack APIs. Ceilometer (and maybe
others?) are already using it. Others, such as Nova, are planning to
use it this cycle. [1][2]
I've used both actually, and I've come to prefer Falcon because of its
simplicity and specifically because of the following things:
* It's lack of integration with WSME, which I don't care for. I don't
care for WSME because I believe it tries to put the model at the view
layer, instead of where it belongs, at the model layer.
* It doesn't need a configuration file, specifically a configuration
file that is a Python file as opposed to an .ini file.
I care less about the particular choice and more about consistency. It
brings a lot of value, such as making it a lot easier for developers to
jump around between the OpenStack projects. Can we first at least agree
that there is value in standardizing on *something* for most OpenStack APIs?
I completely understand the need for consistency. I pushed my patch as
an example of how to do things the Falcon way. While I would prefer
Falcon over Pecan (and certainly over Pecan+WSME), I will respect the
push towards consistency if that's what is most important.
That said, I also believe that the projects in Stackforge should be the
"laboratories of experiment", and these projects may serve as a good
playground for various implementations of things. I remind the reader
that over time, the development community has standardized on various
things, only to find a better implementation in an incubated project.
Pecan+WSME is actually an example of that experimentation turned
accepted standard.
Best,
-jay
I understand that there may be cases where the needs for an API justify
being different. Marconi being more of a data-plane API vs
control-plane means that performance concerns are much higher, for example.
If we agree that consistency is good, does Solum have needs that make it
different than the majority of OpenStack APIs? IMO, it does not.
Can someone lay out a case for why all OpenStack projects should be
using Falcon, if that's what you think Solum should use?
Also, is anyone willing to put up the equivalent of Jay's review [3],
but with Pecan+WSME, to help facilitate the discussion?
[1]
http://icehousedesignsummit.sched.org/event/b2680d411aa7f5d432438a435ac21fee
[2]
http://icehousedesignsummit.sched.org/event/4a7316a4f5c6f783e362cbba2644bae2
[3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/55040/
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
